Anies, you seem to have kept on repeating yourself for so many times about a company that has gone into suspension for more than a month would not have a happy ending. Here is my response to you which I have shared in response to Capraise in the other thread. Please stop scaring the innocent holders regarding this matter once and for all.
Just to illustrate with respect to timing and relisting price of a 17.3 rule suspension, take a look at GMV. GMV was on trading halt by its own request on the 6th Sep 2019, then ASX suspended GMV pursuant to Listing Rule 17.3 on the 17th Sep, for failure to respond to ASX's query.From announcement on 9th Oct, it was clear that ASX queried GMV on 2nd Sep and GMV responded on the 8th Oct. It also said that the enquiries were still ongoing.On 22nd Oct announcement, we understood that ASX sent another query letter on the 16th Oct and GMV replied on the 21st Oct. On the same day, 22nd Oct, ASX lifted its suspension after receiving the reply to the queries the day before. ON ITS FIRST DAY OF TRADING AFTER in SUSPENSION FOR 34 DAYS (or 49 days since the first query letter by ASX), GMV CLOSED AT 48% HIGHER with volume of share transaction about sevenfold of the day before suspension. Go take a look, and stop spreading lies ! This proves the point that you CAN'T conclude that EVERY SUSPENSION WILL END UP BAD FOR EXISTING SHAREHOLDERS ! Please DYOR, don't just take my words for it. Disclosure: I don't own shares in GMV
- Forums
- ASX - By Stock
- Ann: Response to ASX Query Letter
Anies, you seem to have kept on repeating yourself for so many...
-
- There are more pages in this discussion • 68 more messages in this thread...
You’re viewing a single post only. To view the entire thread just sign in or Join Now (FREE)